Idea Lawyer Blog

Google Millionaires and their Second Life

Not Katrina, but when the rain comes down, so do the palm branches...
We DO need the rain:)

Photo credit: YoursTruly
Rightfully reserved
Use with caution

Corporate theft of amateur photos is "exposed" in this rollicking Washington Post article
Stolen Web SnapShots
From theft to teen photos posted on Flickr causing suit against Virgin Mobile Australia (alleging invasion of privacy of the teen girl, whose light-hearted photo taken at a church car-wash is plastered all over advertisements without her family's consent, and failure to credit the amateur photographer, a violation of Flickr policy) to repeated posting of stolen pictures on Babble (blamed on an intern intractably oblivious to copyright law and who, according to the article, was fired because of the copyright flap).
Larry Lessig of Stanford University and founder of The Creative Commons, opines that as average folks have their own material appropriated, it will eventually results in better behaved individuals and corporations.
To understand the "Microsoft was mooned" reference, we commend you to this amusing article.
We find the solution one photo-filching victim employed gives a new slant on "self-help."

http://www.booksinmyphone.com/

Music consumers & creators: more on Radiohead

RADIOHEAD

The band Radiohead made waves recently by releasing their latest album over the Internet with a “pay what you like” pricing model: anyone visiting their website could download a full copy, with payment optional and completely voluntary.

According to The New York Times, the best estimates are that about 62% of downloaders early on were freeloaders: they paid nothing. Those who pay, pay somewhere around $6, so the average payment for the album works out to around $2.26 . . . far under $16 or more most people pay for the average new-release CD.

Will this prove a workable business model, long-term? The model cuts out the record companies and retailers who, between them, take around 85% of the retail price, leaving only 15% for the band. Without speculating about the model’s impact on the future of the music industry, I pose a few questions:

Most of us were raised to pay for what we get—something near the idea that “the workman is worthy of his hire.” On the other hand, that ethos has always been reinforced by the notion that everyone else is required to pay, too. How long, do you think, before people who actually pay for pay-what-you-like downloads start feeling like suckers? And when (if) they do, how long before that begins placing downward pressure on what they’re willing to play? And how long before that downward pressure ruins the business model? (Yes, digital distribution squeezes a lot of costs out of the system—but a million times nothing is still nothing.)

What do you think? Is “pay what you like” a sustainable business model, or some interesting hybrid of business model and social gesture with an inherently limited application?

If you have thoughts on the matter, please feel free to e-mail me at: bob (at) idealawyerblog dot com.